Showing posts with label anti-capitalist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-capitalist. Show all posts

Saturday, 12 January 2013

Economics of Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Globalist and Radical Green Movements



From P2P Foundation


Jump to: navigation, search

* Book: Babylon and Beyond. The Economics of Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Globalist and Radical Green Movements. By Derek Wall.

Review

Jeremy Williams:
"This is a vital book for those who, like me, recognise that there is much to stand against in our current consumer culture, but who find themselves caught between light-bulb replacing platitudes on one side, and angry radicalism on the other. It turns out that the protest movement is broader and more diverse than I realised, and more thought-out and intentional than the news footage would imply.
Anyone with a social conscience and a eye on the newspapers knows that the consumer society is not all it seems, that there is a catalogue of atrocities behind the shiny veneer. We know that the gap between the rich and the poor is widening, that trade is unfair, that our consumption patterns are unsustainable, and that globalisation has not delivered its much lauded benefits evenly. The problem is, what do you do about it? How else could it work? And even if we can imagine an alternative, where do you start dismantling a whole world order?
Babylon and Beyond explores the many different answers to those questions. For some, the answer lies in reform of our financial institutions, making sure globalisation continues, but more fairly, at a workable pace. Others believe that the system is beyond repair, and we need communism instead, or to revert to peasant farming and self-sufficiency. Some want to focus on corporations, others on monetary reform. There are an awful lot of ideas and potential solutions out there, some good, practical and possible, others not so useful.
Derek Wall is a historian and an economist, and a leading member of the UK Green Party, which makes him the perfect guide through this maze of ideas. Wall knows which voices are the ones worth listening too, whether he agrees with them or not. So George Soros and Joseph Stiglitz get a whole chapter between them, as the leading voices for change within the capitalist system, a kind of `more but better' globalisation that Wall suggests `illustrates the truth that a bridge that only stands on one side of the river is no bridge at all'. David Korten and Naomi Klein, with their focus on corporations and brands, are another chapter. Localism, marxism and anarchism are also explored.
For me personally, the chapter on ecosocialism resonated the most, a marriage between green politics and a marxist understanding of capitalism. The view that capitalism is responsible for the current ecological crisis is self-evident to me, so I sympathise with the ecosocialist cause. I also value the insight that there are two kinds of environmentalism - north and south. In the north, environmentalism is a choice, an optional concern. In the south, it is a matter of life and death.
The future will undoubtedly pick and choose from many of the different philosophies here, but what I appreciate most is that Wall is confident that these movements are not wasting their time. Although some are not going far enough, and some are barking up the wrong tree, Wall sees hope in all sorts of places, like the slow movement, open source software, allotments. In fact underpinning the book is the belief that `economics can be bent towards serving the needs of humanity and nature rather than its own violent abstract growth', and that's an important message." (http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2011/08/economics-can-be-bent-towards-serving.html)

More Information



Wednesday, 9 January 2013

Derek Wall

 
I, once, met Derek Wall when he gave a talk in St Marys Church in Slough. In his most recent book at the time (if I recall correctly) he showed me an image of Clifford Douglas, the founder of Social Credit on a banknote!
 
RS
 
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to: navigation, search

Derek Wall
Former Principal Speaker of the Green Party
In office
2006–2008
Personal details
Political partyGreen Party of England and Wales

Derek Wall giving a keynote speech at the Green Party of England and Wales conference, Reading, 2008
Derek Wall is an English politician and member of the Green Party of England and Wales. He is currently International Coordinator of the Green Party. Formerly the party's Principal Speaker, he is known as a prominent ecosocialist, campaigning both for environmentalism and socialism. Alongside his political role, Wall is an academic and a writer, having published on the subject of ecosocialism and the wider Green politics movement. He is a contributor to the Morning Star newspaper and a blogger.

Contents

[edit] Biography

[edit] Early political activism

Wall first became involved in the Green movement in 1979. He joined the Ecology Party (later the Green Party of England and Wales) in 1980. By 1987, Wall was standing for the Ecology Party against Chris Patten in Bath. At the time of the European Parliament election in 1989, Wall was one of three National Speakers in the Green Party. In the elections themselves, which saw the Green Party gain over 2 million votes (14.5% of the national poll), Wall received 15% of the vote in the Bristol constituency. During his time in the Green Party, Wall has been a Parish Councillor.[1]
Wall rose to national prominence in the wake of the 1989 result, when he presented himself to the national press as a 'left wing' candidate for the ruling Green Party Council in opposition to the leadership. He styled himself a 'maverick'[2] and a Green 'fundamentalist'.[3] He was then in turn attacked as a 'parasite' by pragmatists such as Sara Parkin and Jonathon Porritt.[4] These divisions contributed to highly negative press coverage at the time.[2][3][4]


[edit] Academic career

Wall teaches economics at Duff Miller[5] - a private sixth form college. He is also a visiting tutor at the Department of Politics at Goldsmiths College, University of London, where he teaches a course on the new radical political economy. His PhD thesis was titled The Politics of Earth First! UK.[1]
He has written a series of books on eco-socialism and green politics. Getting There: Steps Towards a Green Society was published in 1990, and looked at the strategies of green politics. A Green Manifesto for the 1990s, also written in 1990, outlined the Green vision. In 1994, a book examining the roots of ecological politics, Green History: A Reader in Environmental Literature, Philosophy, and Politics and Weaving a Bower Against Endless Night: An Illustrated History of the Green Party as a Green Party publication appeared.[6] Having taken a BSc in Archaeology at the University of London, he subsequently completed a PhD at the University of the West of England, later published in a revised form in 1999 as a book entitled Earth First! and the Anti-Roads Movement: Radical Environmentalism and Comparative Social Movements.[1] Academic reviews for the book were mixed. One academic reviewer commented that the book offered "valuable and often original information about the radical environmentalist movement" but "fails to provide a systematic analysis of the topic" and uncritically paid little attention to possible personal agendas of the activists interviewed.[7]
Babylon and Beyond: The Economics of Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Globalist and Radical Green Movements (2005), looks at the history of anti-capitalism, including reformist capitalists (such as Joseph Stiglitz), anti-corporate critics (namely Naomi Klein and David Korten), monetary reformers, eco-socialists (especially Joel Kovel), Marxists, green localists (including Caroline Lucas, Mike Woodin and Vandana Shiva) and anarchists (particularly Michael Hardt and Toni Negri). It includes a foreword by Nandor Tanczos, the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand MP.[8]
Wall has written for the left-wing magazine Red Pepper and is an advisory editor of Socialist Resistance.[9] He has also published articles in academic journals such as Environmental Politics, Social Movement Studies and Capitalism Nature Socialism.[1]

[edit] Later political activism

Wall was also a prominent figure opposing the organisational changes by the group known as Green 2000 along with Penny Kemp and John Norris.[10] Organising a faction within the Green Party known as the Association of Socialist Greens, this left grouping was accused by pragmatists such as Mallen Baker as being responsible for ensuring the party was "going knowhere fast".[11]
Wall is an eco-socialist and anti-capitalist who believes that "an infinitely growing capitalist economy destroys nature, fuels injustice and leads to an alienated way of life".[1] He describes Green politics as "the politics of survival", stressing that "unless we build a green economy based on meeting need rather than greed our children face a bleak future".[1] Distinguishing between socially-oriented development and capitalist growth, Wall asserts that there is "no contradiction between development and ecology," while, on the other hand, there is "a contradiction between capitalist economic growth and human life – and the life of all other species."[12] He adds that "a world dominated by the need for constant growth puts people and the rest nature behind a blind economic system of accumulation."[1] He is a founder member of the Green Left, an anti-capitalist and eco-socialist faction within the Green Party, which held its first meeting in June 2006.[13]
His critique of Green Party politics is that ambition tends to dilute policy, reduce democracy and lead to failure. He says of the Green 2000 project to modernise the executive structures and reduce the number of Principal Speakers to two:
“The right around the Green 2000 faction wanted to make us into a mainstream party with mass appeal, ditch the radicalism, re-engineer the Party constitution and centralise power. We fought them. I remember Sara Parkin talking to the Independent about 'socialist parasites' i.e. myself and Penny Kemp who had been members nearly as long as her. They won and then imploded, when the Party received just a couple of percentage at the 1992 General Election. When the 'realists' believe in achieving a Westminster Parliamentary government by 2000 (thus Green 2000), give me fundamentalism.”[10]
Wall has continued to be an out-spoken member of the Green Party, particularly on the issue of entering into alliances with other parties. He was given a vote of censure by the Green Party Association of Green Councillors (AGC) when he made comments concerning the alliance between Green Party, Conservative and Liberal Democrat councillors on the Leeds City Council; he stated in Red Pepper magazine that, "While I understand that repellent Labour councils may be the only substitute for alliances with Liberal Democrats and Conservatives, the fall in our Leeds West vote suggests that voters were displeased by a perceived shift to the right by Yorkshire Greens".[14]
At the 2005 general election, Wall stood as a candidate for Windsor and received 2.5% of the votes. In November 2005, he was beaten by Keith Taylor in the election to be the Male Principal Speaker of the Green Party, by 851 votes to 803.[1] He was narrowly elected as one of two principal speakers of the Green Party of England and Wales in November 2006, alongside Sian Berry. In 2007 he was re-elected as Male Principal Speaker alongside Caroline Lucas, elected to the post of Female Principal Speaker. The position of principal speaker was the closest role to that of leader within the Green Party until 2008.
He was prominent in the Green Empowerment group that campaigned against the creation of a single leader and deputy leader instead of the Principal Speaker system. He attacked the proposal for a referendum in Swansea:
I find the title "leader" embarrassing: it is so patronising, assuming a bunch of people have to be "led", the shepherd label that assumes the members are sheep.[15]
Wall's critique centred on the link between the structure of leadership and ambition of the party; and the likelihood that a Leader coupled with ambition would be part of a project to move the party to the "right":
Political parties universally tend to attract those addicted to fame and careerism. ... Clearly, the biggest barrier to green electoral victory is the lack of proportional representation. Greens have been elected around the world in countries with PR. ... The fear is that a leader will shift the party to the right, cutting the Greens' radical edge. ... The call for a single leader would compromise the party's commitment to radical democracy. It also suggests a failure to think about strategy in any real sense. The fear is that it could be part of a more extensive shift towards a new green politics of shallow environmentalism, rather than a thorough critique of an unequal, profit-motivated society.[16]
He also linked the idea of a leadership structure directly to abuse of power. His September 2007 keynote speech took up this theme:
what is power? You can't touch it or taste it. Sometimes I think you can smell it, like wealth or sewage, and if it is piled up in one place it stinks like rotten cod. For it to smell sweet, we need to spread it around. For power to be creative, we need to spread it around.
Collecting power in one place is like collecting money in a mega billion bank account, the work of a miser, a misery, a self obsessed fanatic. Green politics is about giving everyone power.[17]
At times, personal attacks surfaced in Wall's comments in the debate. Replying to a Guardian letter from Jonathon Porritt and others supporting leadership, Wall drew parallels with Porritt's own behaviour as a green 'leader':
Jonathon Porritt's call for the Green Party to select a single leader is flawed. Rather than suggesting the Green Party becomes a little more like the conventional top down political parties, Jonathon could show a little more personal leadership. Last year he took 42 flight clocking up air miles to go to meetings to tell people to cut CO2. I am calling on Jonathon to use video conferencing a little more and to fly a little less.[18]
In the subsequent party-wide referendum, 73% of members polled voted to create a single leader. Wall said of the result, "The result of this referendum challenges the Party to create a leadership structure that is true to green ideals. It has put our future leaders on notice that the membership expects a more focused, more effective party, with a leadership team that is truly accountable to the membership in a real and effective manner".[19]
Nevertheless in 2010 he declared himself a candidate for the post of deputy leader under the new system, losing to the incumbent Adrian Ramsay. During his Deputy Leader campaign, Wall continued to promote the view that a “right” wing of the Green party is attempting to subvert its democracy, agreeing that “talk of ‘modernising’ the Green Party [is] actually code for changing inner Party democracy and changing the politics of the Party”.[20] Nevertheless, Wall's opponents, the joint ticket of Adrian Ramsay and Caroline Lucas, continue to promote both reform of the party and a left-leaning politics.[21] Derek's defeat was met with disappointment from Green Lib Dems, who cited his defeat as a loss of a “good source of ammunition against the [Green] party”.[22]

[edit] Moving beyond capitalism

[edit] Strategies

In a chapter of Babylon and Beyond entitled "Life After Capitalism: Alternatives, Structures, Strategies", Wall suggests that "conventional economics is surprisingly dangerous for a subject normally portrayed as a neutral science", and advocates the proposition of "solid liveable alternatives" by the anti-capitalist movement. Though he does not discount the "plots and plans" of the corporate lobby, American neo-conservatives free market liberals, which are "hardly secret", he criticises the tendency of many anti-capitalists to be attracted to "warm conspiracies" which "generate a personal enemy with a human face who can be challenged". Instead, he wishes to address the "structural element" of capitalism, drawing on the critical realist philosophy of Roy Bhaskar, who suggests that "invisible structures", like capitalism and language, shape society but can themselves be changed by human activity. This means that "the conspirators construct, where they are successful, new structures, but as capitalists they are themselves bearers of deeper structural imperatives to exploit labour, subjectivity and the earth".[8]
Stating that "history does not march to a predictable narrative", Wall criticises the determinism of some Marxists, on the one hand, who promote "hyperglobalisation" in an attempt to move the world closer to the apparently inevitable socialist order, and, on other hand, subsistence ecofeminists, who look to turn to clock back to the time of peasant societies. He rejects productivism in favour of "in different contexts economic arrangements that fulfil need equitably, develop humanity, sustain ecosystems and lead to cooperation".[8]

[edit] Propositions

Wall first suggests "embedded markets", embedded in society, with "state provision decentralised", as a first step to adapt capitalism. He cites the example of the Indian adivasis, who regained the land they originally inhabited and sold tea via the Fair Trade system. Here, Wall argues that "social preference rather than profit maximisation socialised economic activity". He welcomes the movements in Argentina that have seen workers occupy and reopen bankrupt factories. He applauds the work done on creating a "decentralised, socialist economy" in Cuba and Venezuela. Wall is encouraged by the growth in Green consumerism, noting that "we cannot shop or work our way to utopia, but such projects ease present ills and point roughly to a different future".[8]
Taking on the work of Marx on the distinction between use-values and exchange-values, Wall stresses that "exchange values must be rejected", so that "economics can be bent towards serving the needs of humanity and nature rather than its own violent abstract growth". This means building things to last and sharing resources: he advocates the increased use of libraries, permaculture and the localisation of economies where possible. He highlights the Rastafarian notion of 'Ital', a form of localism in which "what is sacred is what comes from the earth and is grown locally", and where localism and internationalism are mixed "without building walls between sects" in what Wall calls a "worldwide rooted cosmopolitanism".[8]
Nonetheless, Wall envisages as the ultimate aim the rolling back of both the market and the state. To this end, he wishes to "defend, extend and deepen" the commons against enclosure as a way of giving people back their means of production. He believes that the extension of the commons provides the best model for consensus-based social and ecological management and sharing. In the same vein, Wall supports Open Source Software as one of the "new commons regimes... created with technological and social change", one which "is a stunning example of how both the market and the state can be bypassed by cooperative creativity". "Marx," he quips, "would have been a Firefox user".[8]

[edit] Non-Violent Direct Action

Wall stresses the importance of combining electoral politics and non-violent direct action to effect change. Babylon and Beyond focuses heavily on unique and creative expressions of anti-capitalist economics and protest, and Wall tells protestors "to keep making noise".[8] He has cultivated ties with African-American and Afro-Caribbean Green activists and takes a strong interest in the controversial Pennsylvania-based African-American organisation MOVE. From 1995, he helped develop a British-based campaign to free US death row prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal.[1]

[edit] Zen

Wall practices zazen and is influenced by spirituality through "pursuing a pagan appreciation of the living world in a variety of ways".[1] In Babylon and Beyond, he argues that Zen acts as a guard against utopianism as it "is based on being in the world rather than escaping from it". He also links anti-capitalism and Zen, stating, based on the work of anthropologist and economist Marshall Sahlins, that "Zen minimises need and provides an alternative road to affluence".[8]

[edit] Quotes

  • How to be green? Many people have asked us this important question. It's really very simple and requires no expert knowledge or complex skills. Here's the answer. Consume less. Share more. Enjoy life.[23]
  • At present cats have more purchasing power and influence than the poor of this planet. Accidents of geography and colonial history should no longer determine who gets the fish.[24]
  • This will be a long fight and anti-capitalism may fail. Nevertheless, at the very worst, even in failure we might succeed in bearing witness to the pathological absurdities of a world where money makes human beings and the rest of nature a means rather than an end.[8]

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Derek Wall's Green Party Page
  2. ^ a b 'Triumph for 'Fundies' hits Green Party, Daily Mail, 21 September 1989
  3. ^ a b 'Greens face wrangles over party leadership, Guardian, 21 September 1989
  4. ^ a b 'Greens Warned of extremist 'parasites, Independent, 22 September 1989
  5. ^ Sixth Form College London with Easter Revision Courses UK - Duff Miller
  6. ^ Wall, Derek, Weaving a Bower Against Endless Night: An Illustrated History of the Green Party, 1994
  7. ^ http://www.webhost.ua.ac.be/extremismanddemocracy/newsletter/Newsletter3.htm#gallagher
  8. ^ a b c d e f g h i Wall, Derek, Babylon and Beyond: The Economics of Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Globalist and Radical Green Movements, 2005
  9. ^ "About : Socialist Resistance: Fourth International in Britain:". Socialist Resistance. http://socialistresistance.org/?page_id=2. Retrieved 2009-11-04.
  10. ^ a b Interview with Wall
  11. ^ Challenge Magazine, Winter 1995
  12. ^ Wall, Derek. Address to Global Future of Globalised Disaster? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD4r6Q3KL3Y&feature=related
  13. ^ Green Left (Green Party of England and Wales) Website
  14. ^ Red Pepper Magazine, Issue 121, June 2005
  15. ^ Green Party 'doesn't need leader', BBC 23 March 2007
  16. ^ Morning Star, Against a Green leader 14 August 2007
  17. ^ Derek wall keynote speech, September 2007
  18. ^ Letter in the Guardian, 8 November 2007
  19. ^ Greens vote overwhelmingly to adopt new leadership model
  20. ^ Natural Choices Interview, 2 September 2010
  21. ^ Adrian Ramsay and Caroline Lucas campaign site
  22. ^ Comment from Joe Otten on Rupert's Read
  23. ^ Kemp, Penny and Wall, Derek, A Green Manifesto for the 1990s, 1990
  24. ^ Quotationsbook.com Derek Wall Quotes

[edit] References

  • Wall, Derek (2010). The No-Nonsense Guide to Green Politics. Oxford: New Internationalist Publications. ISBN 978-1-906523-39-8.

[edit] Bibliography

  • Wall, Derek, Getting There: Steps Towards a Green Society, 1990. ISBN 1-85425-034-5
  • Kemp, Penny and Wall, Derek, A Green Manifesto for the 1990s, 1990. ISBN 0-14-013272-4
  • Wall, Derek, Green History: A Reader in Environmental Literature, Philosophy, and Politics, 1994. ISBN 0-203-41013-0
  • Wall, Derek, Weaving a Bower Against Endless Night: An Illustrated History of the Green Party, 1994. ISBN 1-873557-08-6
  • Wall, Derek, Earth First! and the Anti-Roads Movement: Radical Environmentalism and Comparative Social Movements, 2002. ISBN 0-203-26346-4
  • Wall, Derek, Babylon and Beyond: The Economics of Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Globalist and Radical Green Movements, 2005. ISBN 0-7453-2390-1

[edit] External links

Political offices
Preceded by
Keith Taylor
Principal Speaker of the Green Party of England and Wales
2006–2008
Succeeded by
Position abolished



Friday, 30 November 2012

The De-Growth Movement


Pro-degrowth graffiti on the July Column in the Place de la Bastille in Paris during a protest against the First Employment Contract, March 28, 2006
Degrowth (in French: décroissance,[1] in Spanish: decrecimiento, in Italian: decrescita) is a political, economic, and social movement based on ecological economics, anti-consumerist and anti-capitalist ideas. Degrowth thinkers and activists advocate for the downscaling of production and consumption—the contraction of economies—as overconsumption lies at the root of long term environmental issues and social inequalities. Key to the concept of degrowth is that reducing consumption does not require individual martyring and a decrease in well-being.[2] Rather, 'degrowthists' aim to maximize happiness and well-being through non-consumptive means—sharing work, consuming less, while devoting more time to art, music, family, culture and community.[3]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Background

Anti-consumerism
Ideas and theory
Spectacle ·Degrowth ·Culture jamming ·Corporate crime ·Media bias ·Buy Nothing Day ·Alternative culture ·Simple living ·Do it yourself ·Advanced capitalism ·Microgeneration ·Autonomous building ·Commodity fetishism ·Consumer capitalism ·Cultural hegemony ·Conspicuous consumption ·Ethical consumerism ·Social democracy ·Progressivism
Related social movements
Punk ·Social anarchism ·Libertarian Socialism · Alter-globalization ·Anti-globalization movement ·Environmentalism ·Situationist International ·Diggers ·Postmodernism ·Occupy Wall Street
Popular works
Society of the Spectacle (book) ·Society of the Spectacle (film) ·Evasion ·No Logo ·The Corporation ·Affluenza ·Escape from Affluenza ·The Theory of the Leisure Class ·Fight Club (novel) ·Fight Club (film) ·Steal This Book ·Surplus: Terrorized into Being Consumers ·Profit over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order ·So, What's Your Price? ·What Would Jesus Buy? ·The Atlantic · The Cultural Creatives
Persons and organizations
Adbusters ·Freecycle ·Slavoj Žižek ·Ralph Nader ·Green party ·John Zerzan ·Noam Chomsky ·Ron English ·Naomi Klein ·CrimethInc. ·Thorstein Veblen ·Hugo Chávez ·Abbie Hoffman ·Guy Debord ·Michael Moore ·José Bové ·Michel Foucault ·RTMark ·Rage Against the Machine ·Jello Biafra ·The Yes Men ·Merce & Ruben ·Democracy Now ·Reverend Billy ·Vandana Shiva ·Bill Hicks ·Columnanegra · Anomie Belle ·Occupy Wall Street ·Thom Yorke ·Kurt Cobain · Alex Jones (radio host) · Webster Tarpley · David Icke · George Noory
Related subjects
Advertising ·Capitalism ·Economic problems ·Left-wing politics ·Sweatshops ·Anti-consumerists ·Social movements
The movement arose from concerns over the perceived consequences of the productivism associated with industrialist societies (whether capitalist or socialist):
  • The reduced availability of energy sources (see peak oil)
  • The declining quality of the environment (see global warming, pollution)
  • The decline in the health of flora and fauna, including humans themselves
  • The ever-expanding use of resources by first-world countries to satisfy lifestyles that consume more food and energy, and produce greater waste, at the expense of the third world (see neocolonialism)

[edit] Resource depletion

As economies grow, the need for resources grows accordingly. There is a fixed supply of non-renewable resources, such as petroleum (oil), and these resources will inevitably be depleted. Renewable resources can also be depleted if extracted at unsustainable rates over extended periods. For example, this has occurred with caviar production in the Caspian Sea.[4] There is much concern as to how growing demand for these resources will be met as supplies decrease. Many people look to technology to develop replacements for depleted resources. For example, some are looking to biofuels to meet the demand gap after peak oil. However, others have argued that none of the alternatives could effectively replace versatility and portability of oil.[5]
Proponents of degrowth argue that decreasing demand is the only way of permanently closing the demand gap. For renewable resources, demand, and therefore production, must also be brought down to levels that prevent depletion and are environmentally healthy. Moving toward a society that is not dependent on oil is seen as essential to avoiding societal collapse when non-renewable resources are depleted.[6] "But degrowth is not just a quantitative question of doing less of the same, it is also and, more fundamentally, about a paradigmatic re-ordering of values, in particular the (re)affirmation of social and ecological values and a (re)politicisation of the economy".[7]

[edit] Ecological footprint

The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Earth's ecosystems. It compares human demand with planet Earth's ecological capacity to regenerate. It represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea area needed to regenerate the resources a human population consumes and to absorb and render harmless the corresponding waste.
According to a 2005 Global Footprint Network report,[8] inhabitants of high-income countries live off of 6.4 global hectares (gHa), while those from low-income countries live off of a single gHa. For example, while each inhabitant of Bangladesh lives off of what they produce from 0.56 gHa, a North American requires 12.5 gHa. Each inhabitant of North America uses 22.3 times as much land as a Bangladeshi. Of the 12.5 hectares used by the North American, 5.5 is located in the United States, and the rest is found in foreign countries.[8] According to the same report, the average number of global hectares per person was 2.1, while current consumption levels have reached 2.7 hectares per person.
In order for the world's population to attain the living standards typical of European countries, the resources of between three and eight planet Earths would be required.[citation needed] In order for world economic equality to be achieved with the current available resources, rich countries would have to reduce their standard of living through degrowth.[citation needed] The eventual reduction of all available resources would lead to a forced reduction in consumption. Controlled reduction of consumption would reduce the trauma of this change.[citation needed]

[edit] Degrowth and Sustainable Development

Degrowth thought is in opposition to all forms of productivist economics. It is, thus, also opposed to sustainable development. While the concern for sustainability does not contradict degrowth, sustainable development is rooted in mainstream development ideas that aim to increase capitalist growth and consumption. Degrowth therefore sees sustainable development as an oxymoron,[9] as any development based on growth in a finite and environmentally stressed world is seen as inherently unsustainable. Since current levels of consumption exceed the Earth's ability to regenerate these resources, economic growth will lead to their exhaustion.[citation needed] Those in favor of sustainable development argue that continued economic growth is possible if consumption of energy and resources is reduced.
Furthermore, growth-based development has been shown to be more effective in expanding social inequality, concentrating wealth in the hands of a few, than in actually generating more wealth and increasing living standards.[10][11] Critics of degrowth argue that a slowing of economic growth would result in increased unemployment and increase poverty. Many who understand the devastating environmental consequences of growth still advocate for economic growth in the South, even if not in the North. But, a slowing of economic growth would fail to deliver the benefits of degrowth—self-sufficiency, material responsibility—and would indeed lead to decreased employment. Rather, degrowth proponents advocate for a complete abandonment of the current (growth) economic system, suggesting that relocalizating and abandoning the global economy in the Global South would allow people of the South to become more self-sufficient and would end the overconsumption and exploitation of Southern resources by the North.[12]

[edit] "The Rebound Effect"

Technologies designed to reduce resource use and improve efficiency are often touted as sustainable or green solutions. However, degrowth warns about these technological advances due to the "rebound effect".[13] This concept is based on observations that when a less resource-exhaustive technology is introduced, behaviour surrounding the use of that technology will change and consumption of that technology will increase and offset any potential resource savings.[14] In light of the rebound effect, proponents of degrowth hold that the only effective 'sustainable' solutions must involve a complete rejection of the growth paradigm and a move toward a degrowth paradigm.

[edit] Origins of the movement

The contemporary degrowth movement can trace its roots back to the anti-industrialist trends of the 19th century, developed in Great Britain by John Ruskin, William Morris and the Arts and Crafts Movement (1819–1900), in the United States by Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862), and in Russia by Leo Tolstoy (1828–1911).
The concept of "degrowth" proper appeared during the 1970s, proposed by the Club of Rome think tank and intellectuals such as Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, Jean Baudrillard, André Gorz, Edward Goldsmith and Ivan Illich, whose ideas reflect those of earlier thinkers, such as the economist E. J. Mishan,[15] the industrial historian Tom Rolt,[16] and the radical socialist Tony Turner. The writings of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi also contain similar philosophies, particularly regarding his support of voluntary simplicity.
More generally, degrowth movements draw on the values of humanism, enlightenment, anthropology and human rights.

[edit] The Club of Rome reports

In 1968, the Club of Rome, a think tank headquartered in Winterthur, Switzerland, asked researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for a report on practical solutions to problems of global concern. The report, called The Limits to Growth, published in 1972, became the first important study that indicated the ecological perils of the unprecedented economic growth the world was experiencing at the time.
The reports (also known as the Meadows Reports) are not strictly the founding texts of the movement, as they only advise zero growth, and have also been used to support the sustainable development movement. Still, they are considered the first official studies explicitly presenting economic growth as a key reason for the increase in global environmental problems such as pollution, shortage of raw materials, and the destruction of ecosystems. A second report was published in 1974, and together with the first, drew considerable attention to the topic.

[edit] Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen's thesis

The Romanian economist Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen is considered the creator of degrowth,[dubious ] and its main theoretician.[17] In 1971, he published a book called The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, in which he noted that the neoclassical economic model did not take into account the second law of thermodynamics, by not accounting for the degradation of energy and matter (i.e. increase in entropy). He associated every economic activity with an increase in entropy, whose increase implied the loss of useful resources. When a selection of his articles was translated into French in 1979 under the title Demain la décroissance ("tomorrow, degrowth"), it spurred the creation of the movement in France.

[edit] Serge Latouche

Serge Latouche, a professor of economics at the Paris-Sud 11 University, has noted that:
If you try to measure the reduction in the rate of growth by taking into account damages caused to the environment and its consequences on our natural and cultural patrimony, you will generally obtain a result of zero or even negative growth. In 1991, the United States spent 115 billion dollars, or 2.1% of the GDP on the protection of the environment. The Clean Air Act increased this cost by 45 or 55 million dollars per year. [...] The World Resources Institute tried to measure the rate of the growth taking into account the punishment exerted on the natural capital of the world, with an eye towards sustainable development. For Indonesia, it found that the rate of growth between 1971 and 1984 would be reduced from 7.1 to 4% annually, and that was by taking only three variables into consideration: deforestation, the reduction in the reserves of oil and natural gas, and soil erosion.
[18][19]

[edit] Schumacher and Buddhist Economics

E. F. Schumacher's 1973 book Small is Beautiful predates a unified degrowth movement, but nonetheless serves as an important basis for degrowth ideas. In this book he critiques the neo-liberal model of economic development, noting the absurdity of increasing "standard of living", which is based solely on consumption, as the primary goal of economic activity and development. Instead, under what he refers to as buddhist economics, we should aim to maximize well-being while minimizing consumption.[20]

[edit] Ecological and social issues

In January 1972 Edward Goldsmith and Robert Prescott-Allen—editors of The Ecologist journal—published the Blueprint for Survival, which called for a radical programme of decentralisation and de-industrialisation to prevent what the authors referred to as "the breakdown of society and the irreversible disruption of the life-support systems on this planet". Signed by leading scientists of the day, the Blueprint went on to inspire the establishment of environmentalist political parties around the world.

[edit] Degrowth movement

[edit] 'Buy Nothing Day'

Buy Nothing Day occurs on the Friday following Thanksgiving Day in the United States. This is the unofficial first day of the Holiday shopping season. Typically retail stores offer goods for dramatically reduced prices, prompting consumers to buy more. Buy Nothing Day is a rejection of this unabashed consumption.

[edit] Conferences

The movement has also included conferences in Paris,[21] Barcelona,[22] and Vancouver.[23]

[edit] Barcelona Conference (2010)

The First International Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity of Paris (2008) was a discussion about the financial, social, cultural, demographical, environmental crisis caused by the deficiencies of the capitalism and an explanation of the main principles of the degrowth. [24] The Second International Conference of Barcelona on the other hand focused on specific ways to implement a degrowth society. It gathered researchers, practitioners, academics and civil society members from forty countries which brought new ideas and allowed the interconnection between social, economic and environmental aspects. The participation of every person was promoted through working groups, each discussing one of the 29 topics of the programme.
The result of this innovative participatory process has brought a major contribution to the Degrowth strategy. Concrete proposals have been developed for future political actions, including:
  • Promotion of local currencies, elimination of fiat money and reforms of interest
  • Transition to non-profit and small scale companies
  • Increase of local commons and support of participative approaches in decision-making
  • Reducing working hours and facilitation of volunteer work
  • Reusing empty housing and co-housing
  • Introduction of the basic income guarantee and an income ceiling built on a maximum-minimum ratio
  • Limitation of the exploitation of natural resources and preservation of the biodiversity and culture by regulations, taxes and compensations
  • Minimize the waste production with education and legal instruments
  • Elimination of mega infrastructures, transition from a car-based system to a more local, biking, walking-based one.
  • Suppression of advertising from the public space [25]
The introduction of these points in our society would require a change of mentality, oriented to a reduction of the consumption and the regrowth of integrity, ethic and social links. This is related to the concept of Simple Living. [26]. It is a personal choice that can be undertaken individually or by small communities, and maybe would grow in larger scale.
In spite of the real willingness of reform and the development of numerous solutions, the conference of Barcelona didn’t have a big influence on our economic and political system. Many critiques have been made concerning the proposals, mostly about the financial aspects, and this has refrained changes to occur. [27]

[edit] Criticisms

[edit] Liberal critique

Supporters of economic liberalism believe that economic growth brings about the creation of wealth, by increasing employment, improving quality of life, and providing better education and healthcare, in other words, there should be more resources in order to make and improve on more things. From this point of view, degrowth constitutes economic recession and is a destroyer of wealth.
An additional liberal criticism of degrowth is that progress is increasingly linked to knowledge rather than the use of physical resources, and that the progress of technology will solve the world's environmental problems. Free-market environmentalism is a position that argues that most environmental problems are caused by a lack of property rights and the extension of such to include externalities.

[edit] Self-regulation of the market

Supporters of the self-regulation of the market believe that if a particular non-renewable resource becomes scarce, the market will limit its extraction via two mechanisms:
This position argues that allowing market forces to take effect is the most rational way of solving the problem, and consider that these forces are more efficient than centralized decision systems (see economic calculation, dispersed knowledge, tragedy of the commons). Market capitalism can take advantage of the exploitation of energy sources that were not economically viable 10 or 20 years prior, because under new conditions the required economic growth will necessitate their use.
In response to the theories of Georgescu-Roegen, Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz noted that capital and labor can substitute for natural resources in production either directly or indirectly, ensuring sustained growth or at least sustainable development.[28]

[edit] Creative destruction

The concept of degrowth is founded on the hypothesis that producing more always implies the consumption of more energy and raw materials, while at the same time decreasing the size of the labor force, which is replaced by machines. This analysis is considered misleading from the point of view that technological progress allows us to produce more with less, as well as provide more services. This is what is known as creative destruction, the process by which the "old" companies from a sector (as well as their costly and polluting technologies) disappear from the market as a result of the innovation in that sector that brings down costs while consuming less energy and raw materials in exchange for increased productivity.
At the same time, this reduction in costs and/or increase in profits increases the ability to save, which simultaneously allows for investment in new advances, which will replace the old technologies.

[edit] Marxist critique

Marxists distinguish between two types of growth: that which is useful to mankind, and that which simply exists to increase profits for companies. Marxists consider that it is the nature and control of production that is the determinant, and not the quantity. They believe that control and a strategy for growth are the pillars that enable social and economic development. According to Jean Zin, while the justification for degrowth is valid, it is not a solution to the problem.[29] However, other Marxist writers have adopted positions close to the de-growth perspective. For example John Bellamy-Foster [30] and Fred Magdoff [31], in common with David Harvey, Imanuel Wallerstein, Paul M. Sweezy and others focus on endless capital accumulation as the basic principle and goal of capitalism. This is the source of economic growth and is unsustainable. Foster and Magdoff develop Marx's own concept of the metabolic rift, something he noted in the exhaustion of soils by capitalist systems of food production.

[edit] Third world critique

The concept of degrowth is viewed as contradictory when applied to lesser-developed countries, which require the growth of their economies in order to attain prosperity. In this sense the majority of supporters of degrowth advocate the attainment of a certain, acceptable level of well-being independent of growth. The question of where the balance lies (i.e. how much the developed nations should degrow by, and how much the developing nations should be allowed to grow), remains open.[citation needed]

[edit] Technological critique

Supporters[who?] of scientific progress argue that it will solve the problems of energy supply, waste and the reduction of raw materials. This ideology draws inspiration from the Enlightenment to develop an optimistic technologist vision. They point to the reduction in the relation between energy consumption and production (or energy intensity) over the past twenty years. They propose that research into nuclear energy could provide temporary energy alternatives to the oil crisis, while technologies such as nuclear fusion come online.[citation needed]
This argument is contrasted by the data obtained by the Global Carbon Project in 2007, which notes the stagnation in the aforementioned decrease in energy intensity, which is one of the variables of the Kaya identity, which tends to show that either the economic downturn, or demographic decline are essential to prevent ecological disaster.[citation needed]

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Institut d'études économiques et sociales pour la décroissance soutenable.(2003). http://decroissance.org/
  2. ^ Zehner, Ozzie (2012). Green Illusions. Lincoln & London: U. Nebraska Press. pp. 178-183, 339-342. ISBN 0803237758. http://GreenIllusions.org.
  3. ^ Economic Degrowth for Sustainability and Equity.(2009). http://www.degrowth.net/Economic-Degrowth-for
  4. ^ Bardi, U. (2008) 'Peak Caviar'. The Oil Drum: Europe. http://www.energybulletin.net/node/46143
  5. ^ McGreal, R. 2005. 'Bridging the Gap: Alternatives to Petroleum (Peak Oil Part II)'. Raising the Hammer. http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=119
  6. ^ Energy Bulletin. (October 20, 2009). Peak Oil Reports. http://www.energybulletin.net/node/50447
  7. ^ Fournier, V. (2008). Escaping from the economy: politics of degrowth. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. Vol. 28:11/12, pp 528-545.
  8. ^ a b http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/data_sources/
  9. ^ Latouche, S. (2004), "Degrowth economics: why less should be much more", Le Monde Diplomatique, November
  10. ^ Latouche, S. (1993). In the Wake of Affluent Society: An Exploration of Post-development. N.J.: Zed Books.
  11. ^ Harvey, D. (2006, June 16). in Sasha Lilley "On Neoliberalism: An Interview with David Harvey". Monthly Review.
  12. ^ Latouche, S. (2004). Degrowth Economics: Why less should be so much more. Le Monde Diplomatique.
  13. ^ Zehner, Ozzie (2012). Green Illusions. Lincoln: U. Neb. Pr.. pp. 172-73, 333-34.
  14. ^ Binswanger, M. (2001), "Technological progress and sustainable development: what about the rebound effect?", Ecological Economics, Vol. 36 pp.119-32.
  15. ^ Mishan, Ezra J., The Costs of Economic Growth, Staples Press, 1967
  16. ^ Rolt, L. T. C. (1947). High Horse Riderless. George Allen & Unwin. pp. 171. http://www.amazon.co.uk/HIGH-HORSE-RIDERLESS-L-T-C-Rolt/dp/B0006ARC3W/.
  17. ^ Martin Parker, Valérie Fournier, Patrick Reedy, The Dictionary of Alternatives: Utopianism and Organization, Zed Books, 2007, p. 69.
  18. ^ Hervé Kempf, L'économie à l'épreuve de l'écologie Hatier
  19. ^ Latouche, Serge (2003) Decrecimiento y post-desarrollo El viejo topo, p.62
  20. ^ Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered. New York: Perennial Library.
  21. ^ "Décroissance économique pour la soutenabilité écologique et l'équité sociale". http://events.it-sudparis.eu/degrowthconference/. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
  22. ^ "Home". http://www.degrowth.eu/. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
  23. ^ "The Tyee – The Degrowth Movement Is Growing". http://thetyee.ca/Life/2010/05/05/Degrowth/. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
  24. ^ Declaration of the Paris 2008 Conference. Retrieved from: http://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Declaration-Degrowth-Paris-2008.pdf
  25. ^ 2nd Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Ethic. 2010. Degrowth Declaration Barcelona 2010 and Working Groups Results. Retrieved from: http://barcelona.degrowth.org/
  26. ^ Simple Living. 2011. Home page. Retrieved November 3rd, 2012, from: http://www.simpleliving.org/
  27. ^ Responsabilité, Innovation & Management. 2011. Décroissance économique pour l’écologie, l’équité et le bien-vivre par François SCHNEIDER. Retrieved from http://www.openrim.org/Decroissance-economique-pour-l.html
  28. ^ William D. Sunderlin, Ideology, Social Theory, and the Environment, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002, p. 154-155.
  29. ^ L'écologie politique à l'ère de l'information, Ere, 2006, p. 68-69
  30. ^ [1], Monthly Review Press.
  31. ^ [2],.

[edit] External links